1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant joined the Army on 28 January 2014 and graduated basic and AIT with no issues, but applicant's command failed to provide the necessary support to address applicant's BH conditions that lead to applicant's discharge. Months later, however, life for the applicant began to change. The applicant's mother became very ill. A close cousin had just committed suicide. Subsequently, the applicant claims being treated with bias. The applicant looked for guidance from the leadership about the applicant's issues and felt shunned. The applicant began receiving negative counseling statements and verbal reprimands, accused of malingering, labelled as combative, dismissed applicant's grievances, and did not refer the applicant to see behavioral health or ACS services. Ultimately, the leadership recommended UCMJ action be imposed upon the applicant. The applicant is a newlywed with a two-year-old and is currently pregnant with a second child. Upon the date of this letter, the applicant is homeless and jumping from home to home, trying to best maintain a decent job all while trying to attend school to obtain a Bachelor in Web Design and Software Development. The applicant desires an upgrade to reap the benefits the applicant desperately wants and needs to take care of the children and secure the type of future the applicant had in mind serving the county and providing for the applicant's children. In a records review conducted on 24 May 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 23 July 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 June 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 9 April 2015, the applicant was disrespectful to SGT V. X., in which the applicant continually interrupted SGT V. X., during a counseling session and continually made smacking noises; On or about 8 April 2015, the applicant failed to be at 0630 accountability formation in the vicinity of building 8422; On or about 27 March 2015, the applicant failed to report to the 3-15 IN motor pool at 1300; On or about 26 March 2015, the applicant failed to report to 0630 accountability formation in the vicinity of building 8422; On or about 23 March 2015, the applicant was disrespectful in language towards SGT V. X, by saying "Fuck you sergeant", or words to that effect; On or about 4 March 2015, the applicant failed to report to 0630 accountability formation in the vicinity of building 8422. At or about 1400, 3 March 2015, without authorization, the applicant left the place of duty, to wit: 3-15 IN motor pool; Between on or about 1 March 2015 and 31 March 2015, the applicant wrongfully communicated a threat to PFC J. A., to wit: injure PFC J. A. by physically assaulting PFC J.A.; On or about 14 January 2015, the applicant failed to report to 0900 work call in the vicinity of building 8422; On or about 12 January 2015, the applicant failed to return to the place of duty at the prescribed time, to wit: 1300 at the 3-15 IN motor pool; On or about 16 December 2014, the applicant failed to report to the appointed place of duty, to wit: 0900 change of responsibility in the vicinity of building 8421; On or about 1 October 2014, the applicant failed to report to 0630 accountability formation in the vicinity of building 8422; and, On or about 26 August 2014, the applicant failed to report to 0630 accountability formation in the vicinity of building 8422. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 29 June 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 July 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 28 January 2014 / 3 years, 23 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 91D10, Power-Generation Equipment / 1 year, 5 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 May 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. Commander's Report, dated 22 June 2015, reflects the applicant received a FG Article 15 on 21 May 2015; Violation of Article 86 x2, Article 91 x2, Article 134; Guilty of all Specifications; The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $773 pay per month for 2 months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 15 May 2015, notes depression followed in BH. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD form 293; self-authored statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is a newlywed with a two-year old and is currently pregnant with a second child. The applicant is attending school and trying to obtain a Bachelor's degree in Web Design. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. (2) Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. (5) Paragraph 14-3, prescribes a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record. (6) Paragraph 14-12b, addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. (7) Chapter 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. e. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, pattern of misconduct. f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends family issues affected behavior. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends that the command failed to provide the necessary support to address applicant's BH conditions that lead to applicant's discharge. The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting to Army standards by providing counseling and the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant contends current homelessness and the need for help. Eligibility for housing support program benefits for Veterans does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. Moreover, all veterans at risk for homelessness or attempting to exit homelessness can request immediate assistance by calling the National Call Center for Homeless Veterans hotline at 1-877-424-3838 for free and confidential assistance. The applicant is a newlywed with a two-year old and is currently pregnant with a second child. The applicant is attending school and is trying to obtain a Bachelor's degree in Web Design. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. No law or regulation provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after leaving the service. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation. AHLTA contains in-service BH disorders of Adjustment Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, and Depression that may mitigate the basis of separation. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found AHLTA contains in-service BH disorders of Adjustment Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, and Depression. However, applicant's Antisocial Personality Disorder most likely developed in early childhood and as such existed prior to service and the weight of the evidence does not support a conclusion that this disorder was exacerbated during applicant's military service, and therefore is not a mitigating factor for applicant's misconduct (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. After reviewing the available information and in accordance with the 3 Sep 2014 Hagel Liberal Consideration Memorandum and the 25 Aug 2017 Clarifying Guidance, it is the opinion of the Agency Behavioral Health advisor that while the applicant has a BH diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder and Depression, these are not mitigating factors for her misconduct. FTR's, disrespect, and communicating a threat are not part of the sequela of symptoms associated with Adjustment Disorder or Depression. However, there is a nexus between these behaviors and Antisocial Personality Disorder. Applicant's personality disorder is likely deeply ingrained, rigid way of thinking and behaving that results in impaired relationships with others that causes applicant to display a pattern of disregarding or violating the rights of others, and not conform to social norms, may repeatedly lie or deceive others, or may act impulsively and/or aggressively. However, applicant's Antisocial Personality Disorder existed prior to service and was not exacerbated during military service, and therefore is not a mitigating factor for applicant's misconduct. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. The Board, after applying liberal consideration, concurred with the Board's Medical Advisor's opinion, and concluded that applicant's Adjustment Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, and Depression do not outweigh the unmitigated basis for applicant's separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the command failed to provide the necessary support to address applicant's BH conditions that lead to applicant's discharge. The Board considered this contention but concluded that due to the seriousness of the pattern of misconduct including conscious, deliberate decisions the applicant made when presented with challenges, the assertion of lack of command support does not excuse the misconduct and the Command did not act in an arbitrary or capricious manner. In this case, the Board determined that the discharge was proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge would allow veterans benefits. The Board determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. (3) The applicant contends homelessness, family struggles, and post service accomplishments warrant an upgrade based on inequity. The Board considered this contention and ........determined the applicant is eligible for VA homelessness assistance with the current discharge of General Under Honorable Conditions. (4) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. c. The Board determined the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant's contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration, the applicant's BH diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, and Depression did not outweigh the unmitigated offenses of disrespect, FTR, communicated a threat, and disobeyed orders, and the discharge was both proper and equitable. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change a. e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210002955 1